VALUTAZIONE IMDb
3,8/10
1177
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaAfter having moved to France, Fuad works night shifts at a museum for Egyptian culture. During long nights, he is repeatedly drawn to a statue representing the seductive ancient goddess Isht... Leggi tuttoAfter having moved to France, Fuad works night shifts at a museum for Egyptian culture. During long nights, he is repeatedly drawn to a statue representing the seductive ancient goddess Ishtar and becomes allured by her visions.After having moved to France, Fuad works night shifts at a museum for Egyptian culture. During long nights, he is repeatedly drawn to a statue representing the seductive ancient goddess Ishtar and becomes allured by her visions.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Recensioni in evidenza
This movie is a remake of a classic Herschell Gordon Lewis film. Lewis, known as the Godfather of Gore, did extreme and extremely silly high concept horror films like The Gore Gore Girls and 2000 Maniacs (remade as a Robert Englund flick about a decade ago). I'm not a huge fan of his and my interest in this movie had more to do with its marketing, which swore it was a hardcore, over-the-top gore film. Honestly, though, this movie seems almost apologetic for its intense content.
It tells the story of an unstable, American restaurant own that moves to Paris with his wife (Caroline Williams of Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Hatchet 3) and college aged daughter (Sophie Monk of The Hills Run Red). He is going broke and goes off his meds then promptly begins hallucinating, believing he has been ordered by an Egyptian goddess to perform a blood sacrifice in her name.
He begins murdering and cooking young people while his suspicious wife noses around and his oblivious daughter is romanced by a local cop. Blood is spilled but it's often slightly off camera, which is disappointing. The opening is pretty awesome and the finale is great but the entire middle is a snooze. A lot of this has to do with a dull supporting cast and a stilted leading man. Caroline Williams and Sophie Monk, the only two actors I had heard of beforehand, are great but they're kind of peripheral to the movie for the most part.
I can't really recommend this movie. The trailer is stronger than the actual film and I found it kind of boring overall. There's certainly worse out there right now so I guess, if you're desperate, give it a look. Just don't expect too much.
It tells the story of an unstable, American restaurant own that moves to Paris with his wife (Caroline Williams of Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Hatchet 3) and college aged daughter (Sophie Monk of The Hills Run Red). He is going broke and goes off his meds then promptly begins hallucinating, believing he has been ordered by an Egyptian goddess to perform a blood sacrifice in her name.
He begins murdering and cooking young people while his suspicious wife noses around and his oblivious daughter is romanced by a local cop. Blood is spilled but it's often slightly off camera, which is disappointing. The opening is pretty awesome and the finale is great but the entire middle is a snooze. A lot of this has to do with a dull supporting cast and a stilted leading man. Caroline Williams and Sophie Monk, the only two actors I had heard of beforehand, are great but they're kind of peripheral to the movie for the most part.
I can't really recommend this movie. The trailer is stronger than the actual film and I found it kind of boring overall. There's certainly worse out there right now so I guess, if you're desperate, give it a look. Just don't expect too much.
Ishtar was Sumerian, not Egyptian. This is a sad attempt to make Goddess worship about sacrifice, which it isn't.
I didn't connect this film with the original until I heard the crazy mans name. Not exactly sure why this is set in Paris or why they changed the focus to the chef. The chef in the original while still being a crazy man was really more of a side character. The casting was OK except for the 30 year old not so fresh faced daughter, who is a horrible actress at least in this but some of that falls on who ever cast this movie because she is clearly 10 + years to old for the character she plays. In a pleasant surprise the mother who I recognized but couldn't place her for awhile in fact it was past the midpoint of the movie until I put it together, I let you figure it out. If your a big horror movie fan you should know who she is. If you read this before you watch the film watch the original at least part of it because I most likely would not have watched the whole movie if I didn't make the connection to the original. Its public domain so it's on YouTube as well as most of the old horror movie channels on Roku or whatever service have like that. It's not horrible but it's not great if you have a problem finding something to watch the 1963 version first the stories are different enough so it won't feel like you've watched twice.
Such big disapointning, pathetic acting, not bad idea of story but such poor way this story was told. Didn't even had pation to watch it till end, canceled at midle of the movie.
One thing this got right is the amount of blood it has. And without having seen the original this is based on (I can only assume that it wasn't a masterpiece either, but still way better than this, it has to be), I can say, that this is really bad. Now I do see the rating this received from others (though none wanted to comment on their rating?) and I can only assume that they were enjoying how bad this is.
Like having a blast watching a bad movie with mates/friends. Kind of like "Tulpa" where I had a really good time, despite (or because) the movie was awful. Now this is more or less aware of how bad it is, it actually tries to play into that fact. But just by acknowledging that you are doing something intentionally, doesn't make it fun. There is also a craft in being bad by purpose. This just is infantile (in more than one way). One example is a sign at the diner, that has a joke, but is being shown for way too long. It's in your face, waving with both hands jumping up and down, right in front of your nose. Again, this may be able to entertain in times (for all the wrong reasons), but it's not good - no pun intended
Like having a blast watching a bad movie with mates/friends. Kind of like "Tulpa" where I had a really good time, despite (or because) the movie was awful. Now this is more or less aware of how bad it is, it actually tries to play into that fact. But just by acknowledging that you are doing something intentionally, doesn't make it fun. There is also a craft in being bad by purpose. This just is infantile (in more than one way). One example is a sign at the diner, that has a joke, but is being shown for way too long. It's in your face, waving with both hands jumping up and down, right in front of your nose. Again, this may be able to entertain in times (for all the wrong reasons), but it's not good - no pun intended
Lo sapevi?
- QuizBlood Feast is the third remake of the 1963 movie of the same name, the first being the 1978 low-budget "Video Nasty" Mardi Gras Massacre" and the second being the 1987 comedy horror, Blood Diner.
- ConnessioniRemake of Blood Feast (1963)
- Colonne sonoreThe Beast (Intro)
Composed by Klaus Pfreundner
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Blood Feast?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Krvava gozba
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Parigi, Francia(Outdoor Scenes)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.200.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 8708 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 4046 USD
- 8 apr 2018
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 8708 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 30 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Blood Feast (2016) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi